Allan Massie: Our lord David Cameron is now the Eurosceptics’ vassal

Having paid the price to appease his anti-EU rump, David Cameron has made himself a slave to their bidding, at Britain’s expense.

“And that is called paying the Dane-geld,

But we’ve proved it again and again,

That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld,

You never get rid of the Dane.”

THERE are people in Britain who regard our membership of the EU as the equivalent of paying the Dane-geld; what follows, they say, is “euro-creep”, the gradual extension of EU powers as it moves towards “ever closer union”. Their fears are, I think, exaggerated, but that they are sincere is undeniable. Hence they greeted David Cameron’s veto in Brussels with glee. When he set off for the EU summit, they feared he would come back as Neville Chamberlain; on his return they greeted him as Churchill.

Yet there is another possible interpretation of Kipling’s verse. The “Danes” are not across the Channel. They are seated on Tory backbenches, and some are in the Cabinet or in office as junior ministers. The Prime Minister’s veto satisfied them for the moment; he has paid them the Dane-geld they demanded. But how long will their satisfaction last? They have tasted blood. They will soon be demanding more. “Once you have paid him the Dane-geld/ You never get rid of the Dane.”

They will soon realise that Cameron’s veto was a piece of gesture politics. He refused consent to a new treaty. So the eurozone countries, with the backing of at least six non-euro countries (and with, probably, at least two of the others to follow) are going ahead without one. What sort of a success is that? A very hollow one. A veto stops something happening: Cameron has stopped nothing. To appease Tory Eurosceptics, Cameron has weakened the UK’s position in the EU. He gained nothing in Brussels by his veto; he has surely lost such influence as he had. Already he is having to backtrack. Chancellor George Osborne suggested the signatories of the new treaty-which-is-not-a-treaty would not be able to use European institutions – the Commission and Court of Justice – to monitor and enforce its provisions. Now the Prime Minister says, or seems to be saying, that he would not try to prevent them from doing so; that would presumably require another use of the veto and lead to acrimony and legal argument in that very court.

Both Cameron and Osborne are adamant the survival of the euro is in our national interest because the consequences of its collapse would severely damage our economy. Yet the Prime Minister chooses to veto measures intended to support it.

The measures may prove inadequate. The eurozone may, indeed, disintegrate. That would be bad news for our economy; it would be bad news for what is left of our influence in the EU itself. The person who says “told you so” is always more likely to be resented than rewarded. But, if the euro does not collapse, if, as seems quite possible, the eurozone countries muddle through, our position on the sidelines will be weaker still, and this will encourage the Tory “Danes” to call for another payment of “Dane-geld”, demands for repatriation of powers and then an in-out referendum. Having yielded to them once and coughed-up a slice of “Dane-geld”, will Cameron be able to resist next time? His position is utterly inconsistent. The Economist’s columnist who goes by the name of Bagehot summed it up: “In Brussels David Cameron tells the EU to beware of breaking-up the single market and stoutly defends free trade rules that apply to all. Yet back home ministers talk of special opt-outs giving British business low-cost deregulated membership of the single market.” Talk about double standards. Bagehot quotes a French view: “Britain wants rights of oversight over the eurozone,” (even though refusing to belong to it), “well, the eurozone needs oversight over the City of London.” This seems reasonable: sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

Alex Salmond accuses Mr Cameron of “blundering into apparently changing the UK’s entire relationship with the EU – without even discussing it with his own Lib Dem coalition colleagues, never mind the devolved administrations in Edinburgh, Cardiff and Belfast.” He is quite right in that Mr Cameron has blundered and right to complain about the lack of consultation.

The inescapable conclusion is that Mr Cameron has put the unity of the Tory party and protecting the City of London, including, apparently, London-based US financial institutions that do not trade with the rest of Europe, above the wider national interest and the interest of the British economy. He has since tried to justify his stance by claiming he was also protecting 150,000 jobs in the financial sector in Scotland. But what evidence is there any of these might have been in danger from the proposals he vetoed in Brussels? He certainly hasn’t offered any.

Since he stood for election as Tory leader six years ago, Mr Cameron has tried to ride two horses. On the one hand he has said he believes in full membership of the EU and in constructive participation; how otherwise could he have persuaded the Lib Dems to form a coalition? On the other hand he has made concessions and offered pledges to that part of his party which does not believe in full membership, but wants either a Swiss-style arm’s length relationship with the EU, or to get out altogether. Now his duplicity – or, more charitably, his uncertainty as to what he truly believes and wants – has caught up with him; and he has opted to appease his party.

So he has been strengthened in the House of Commons – till the next demand for Dane-geld – and immeasurably weakened in the council chambers of Europe where any arguments, recommendations or demands he makes will henceforth be met with suspicion, hostility and even disdain. His weakness in Europe means he is no longer a free agent at home, but has become the prisoner of the Eurosceptics. If he yields to their next demand it is hard to see how the coalition can hold.

There is one other consequence. Unless he changes course again, it is difficult to see how any pro-European can vote for the Conservatives in the next general election. Never mind: for the moment, the Tory backbenches cheer David Cameron. Fog in Channel: Continent Isolated. Britain stands alone. Great.